Free B-Berry and I Look Back by Dornford Yates

One was the case I referred to in As Berry and I Were Saying , which attracted little attention because of the Crippen Case. Only the lady in the case knew who the murderer was: and she wouldn’t talk. The other was the case of Kensit. Kensit was a very Low Churchman. As such he deeply resented the High Church practices of the Incumbent of St Cuthbert’s, Earl’s Court. His resentment blossomed into fanaticism and again and again he led a number of supporters, whom he had inflamed, to the precincts of St Cuthbert’s – and sometimes into the church itself – where he and they protested violently against the ceremonial observed. As a natural result, supporters of the Incumbent of St Cuthbert’s were mobilized, to deal with this unwarrantable behaviour, and since religious feelings can run very high, serious clashes took place. On the last occasion, although the police did their best, there was a battle royal and Kensit was killed. A file, driven into his eye, entered his brain. Such was the mêlée that the police never saw the blow struck. Possibly no one did. The fact remains that no one was ever arrested for that great wickedness. Still, the murder sobered both factions, as well it might: and that was the last of the clashes with which, in the name of Religion, the Sabbath Day was profaned.
    “Well, there are my two. Some of my contemporaries would probably suggest that there were more but, unless my memory is letting me down, I am inclined to think that my figure is correct. You see, they would include some cases which I do not. Regarding some of those cases, I shall say nothing, and I must beg you to let me leave it at that. But in the period which I have mentioned there were, to my knowledge, two cases in which the murderer was known, but in the public interest was never brought to trial.
    “And now just let me say this. First I am telling you something which I did not , repeat not , learn in the course of my duty – that is to say, while I was with the Solicitors to the Commissioner of Police or with Treasury Counsel. I was told it years afterwards by a man who is now dead, whom I came to know very well. And I have the best of reasons for believing that his report was true. Secondly, in neither of these cases was there any question of shielding anyone, or of sparing the feelings of the well-to-do. The persons involved were not rich and their names were virtually unknown. But the circumstances of both crimes were so demoralizing that no one who knew the truth could condemn the decisions taken by the authorities.
    “Now of the first case I am only going to say that it was a most painful affair and that no injustice was done by not making an arrest. Of the second, I shall say more, but not very much. This appeared to be an ordinary, straightforward case: the victim was dead: his assailant had made himself scarce. With little enough to go on, the CID got down to it, and after some excellent work by Detective-Inspector — the man was found. But before he was so much as arrested – let alone charged – the man made so startling a statement that Detective-Inspector — decided to hold his hand. Arranging for the man to be watched, he hastened back to the Yard and made his report. The man’s statement was investigated and found to be, if anything, less than the truth. These facts were immediately communicated to the Authorities and it was decided that, in the public interest, the case must be dropped.”
    There was a little silence.
    Then –
    “When you say ‘dropped’,” said Berry…
    “Well, so great was the man’s provocation that, had the case come to be tried, there can be no doubt that the charge of murder would have been reduced to one of manslaughter. All the same, he stood in jeopardy, and I assume that he was told that, provided he left the country, the warrant for his arrest would stay on the file. Any way, I have reason to believe that he emigrated within the month.
    “Now please don’t think